Nuns get involved in the battle for the White House

[kimmielittle]

You can call it anything you want, but what Sister Simone teaches isn’t Catholicism. As long as you’ve been here, you really don’t have much of an excuse to claim that you don’t know otherwise.

my bold

EXACTLY!!!

 

[CMatt25]

The advanced ages of sisters who have taken to politics shouldn’t trouble anyone.

Look at the photos. Mighty young, most of them. Well-educated too, a lot of them are RNs. They actually go out and help young women who are pregnant and poor, themselves. They are not the appendages of any political party.

I contribute to their support, and encourage others here to do so as well. This is the future of sisters in America, God willing, and I think it probably is.

That’s my concern. I have heard the younger priests and religious in the Catholic Church are generally more conservative and I fear very much, if they are not already, that they will become appendages of the Republican Party. I only know and can share with you an incident from personal experience from when I once attended a weekday Catholic Mass at the territorial parish for Catholics who live in my neighborhood. Being that it was the closest and the schedule worked for me, it’s where I went that day. This was not long ago, around the time the country was in the Great Recession. And the young priest in his homily was discussing how some of the parishoners were complaining about the parish asking for money for something and these parishoners thought the money could instead be used towards helping the poor. He said and I quote, “My answer to the poor is to get a job”. Had I not been there because I was there in memory of a loved one, I would have gotten right up and walked out after hearing that. I only one other time since attended a Catholic Mass there due to scheduling. But my earlier experience weighed too heavily on my conscience and I’ve never gone back there. But it’s the kind of thinking of that young priest that gives rise to my concerns.

 

[Lochias]

That reminds me of what some Orthodox Jews say about both Conservative and Reform Judaism: what the rabbis teach is not Judaism.

Can’t speak for Jusaism, but Catholicism hasn’t changed in 2000 years. Sister Simone is not espousing a Catholic way of life. Her religion has become an entity unto itself. I can’t make her change her views, but I can certainly correct anyone who thinks she’s teaching correct Catholic doctrine.

She isn’t. Not by a long shot.

 

[Lochias]

That’s my concern. I have heard the younger priests and religious in the Catholic Church are generally more conservative and I fear very much, if they are not already, that they will become appendages of the Republican Party. I only know and can share with you an incident from personal experience from when I once attended a weekday Catholic Mass at the territorial parish for Catholics who live in my neighborhood. Being that it was the closest and the schedule worked for me, it’s where I went that day. This was not long ago, around the time the country was in the Great Recession. And the young priest in his homily was discussing how some of the parishoners were complaining about the parish asking for money for something and these parishoners thought the money could instead be used towards helping the poor. He said and I quote, “My answer to the poor is to get a job”. Had I not been there because I was there in memory of a loved one, I would have gotten right up and walked out after hearing that. I only one other time since attended a Catholic Mass there due to scheduling. But my earlier experience weighed too heavily on my conscience and I’ve never gone back there. But it’s the kind of thinking of that young priest that gives rise to my concerns.

So one priest is uncharitable towards the poor, and your entire faith is shaken. Jesus covered that kind of faith in his parable about the weeds already.

 

[seekerz]

Nothing wrong with calling out a budget for things you site here, slander is where it crosses the line. Like pushing granny of the cliff? Do you really think he doesn’t care about the elderly or the poor because he sees the need to cut spending?

ALL spending needs to be cut, drastically; we have borrowed over 6 trillion dollars in the last 4 years, experts say at the end of another 4 year spending spree the interest alone will be 92% of the revenue income to the government. Question, if you tax every person 100% who make over the magic number of $250K, if they would be stupid enough to keep working, in this country, would this pay for this? The answer is NO!

So I ask you, what would the proper tax rate be for a person who makes $1 million in earned income in a year? If that number was given to you, would you agree that entitlement programs still need to be cut, I mean actual cuts and not decreases in increased spending? The whole democrat fight against tax plans by any republican is class warfare, divide and conquer. Divide the Church, divide the opposition to evil.

I think, from your posts you are sincere - I just don’t think you see the whole picture. Were you around on the forum for the health care debate and the talk of death panels? Talk of throwing granny off a cliff is where the rhetoric’s been at for a while now…

Cutting spending has to be done first with the least necessary things - not necessarily with the biggest expenditures. Increasing revenue has to be simultaneous. What tax rate? Not being an economist I could not say. What I can say is that if people perceive a debt crisis, they should not be opposed to contributing to helping put out the fire. When the crisis is over then maybe the rates can be relaxed too…just my reasoning - I am by no means a financial/tax expert.

When I hear a candidate promise to cut taxes without showing how he is going to make up the revenue, it gives me pause…particularly when that candidate’s vision is, at present, very unclear to me except for his expressed lack of concern for half the nation.

I find it kind of curous that you are speaking in terms of good and evil here? Who’s the good guy and who’s the evil one? Based on what criteria exactly?

 

[seekerz]

So one priest is uncharitable towards the poor, and your entire faith is shaken. Jesus covered that kind of faith in his parable about the weeds already.

How can you use one reaction to measure a person’s faith? I don’t see where he expressed loss of faith in God, although it seems clear he is less than impressed with the RCC.

 

[Lochias]

How can you use one reaction to measure a person’s faith? I don’t see where he expressed loss of faith in God, although it seems clear he is less than impressed with the RCC.

I didn’t measure anything. I used his own measurements. He said that that one experience drove him away from that parish. If one disagreement of opinion can drive a person out of a building forever, I’d say that’s pretty telling about their level of faith, at least at the time.

 

[Tampa_Dave]

That’s my concern. I have heard the younger priests and religious in the Catholic Church are generally more conservative and I fear very much, if they are not already, that they will become appendages of the Republican Party. I only know and can share with you an incident from personal experience from when I once attended a weekday Catholic Mass at the territorial parish for Catholics who live in my neighborhood. Being that it was the closest and the schedule worked for me, it’s where I went that day. This was not long ago, around the time the country was in the Great Recession. And the young priest in his homily was discussing how some of the parishoners were complaining about the parish asking for money for something and these parishoners thought the money could instead be used towards helping the poor. He said and I quote, “My answer to the poor is to get a job”. Had I not been there because I was there in memory of a loved one, I would have gotten right up and walked out after hearing that. I only one other time since attended a Catholic Mass there due to scheduling. But my earlier experience weighed too heavily on my conscience and I’ve never gone back there. But it’s the kind of thinking of that young priest that gives rise to my concerns.

Sounds like an appropriate situation for applause. If you are able-bodied and of sound mind, get a job! If you have extra time and the first job does not pay enough, work a second job. If you have family nearby, pool resources. Work. Pay taxes. Be a productive citizen. Carry your own weight. For those who are physically disabled or mentally challenged, their situation is different. These people should utilize existing private and government safety nets. I donate to Catholic charities solely to assist mentally ill, physically handicapped and elderly citizens. No doubt much of my tax money goes to safety net programs for those incapable of caring for themselves. And that is fine. But if you are capable of working, get a job. Period.

 

[seekerz]

I can, using her own words:

weeklystandard.com/blogs/catholic-nun-dnc-speaker-simone-campbell-abortion-s-beyond-my-pay-grade_651775.html

AND this is Mr Obama’s stance

climaterealistponderings.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/117952_600.jpg

Evidently, she doesn’t know Church Teaching:

I see nothing in your post to suggest the good sister does not support the sanctity of life. Not everybody supports penalties against doctors who perform abortions - and with good reason.

For those who did not know it, proving an abortion generally requires the cooperation of professionals trained in the art of medicine. To my knowledge, the right of a woman to choose abortion is supported/condoned by most doctors. Of those whom I know (and I know a few) almost none would participate in legal measures against a colleague because of abortion - EVEN if they personally are opposed to the practice. If any headway is going to be made in getting women to choose life over abortion, it won’t likely be done by antagonizing the medical profession.

***It would help us all to get used to the idea that opposing abortion does not mean automatic support for whatever strategy any segment of the pro-life movement chooses to pursue. ***Each of us has our own views, and my oft-stated view on the forum is that abortion will only be significantly impacted when less women want them (because by one means or the next, they have learned to properly value life by themselves learning what it is to be appropriately valued themselves).

 

[stevegravy]

Sounds like an appropriate situation for applause. If you are able-bodied and of sound mind, get a job! If you have extra time and the first job does not pay enough, work a second job. If you have family nearby, pool resources. Work. Pay taxes. Be a productive citizen. Carry your own weight. For those who are physically disabled or mentally challenged, their situation is different. These people should utilize existing private and government safety nets. I donate to Catholic charities solely to assist mentally ill, physically handicapped and elderly citizens. No doubt much of my tax money goes to safety net programs for those incapable of caring for themselves. And that is fine. But if you are capable of working, get a job. Period.

 

[seekerz]

I didn’t measure anything. I used his own measurements. He said that that one experience drove him away from that parish. If one disagreement of opinion can drive a person out of a building forever, I’d say that’s pretty telling about their level of faith, at least at the time.

So his faith is related to the building he was ‘driven’ out of?

 

[Lochias]

So his faith is related to the building he was ‘driven’ out of?

To him? Apparently. Which is my point.

 

[CMatt25]

Again, I challenge you to show these nuns protect the sanctity of life.

This is illustrated as with the process of placement of justices who will vote to overturn R vs. W. If we elect another term for Obama, we will insure another possible generation of legal abortion on demand.

Unlike you Lapey who apparently think you can, as in the words of Seekerz, “I cannot speak to the nuns’ position on abortion, but I would expect that it is aligned with that of the Church.”

I suspect the nuns pray deeply for the sanctity of life and pray every child brought into this world is wanted, loved, and cared for. Much like Catholics and Christians of various stripes and people of faith all over the world do. The nuns also protect the sanctity of life if you were to understand life’s sanctity includes not only the unborn. But as others have explained, I think Seekerz has done a great job in explaining this to you. Far better than I ever could. But caring about life starts before conception and goes far beyond the womb. To the lives of the poor, the lives of women before and after a pregnancy, the lives of children born into this world…

And I have already seen where many practicing faithful Catholics have already explained to you on another thread why they are not convinced electing Mitt Romney POTUS means the overturn of Roe, given the results of past nominations to the SCOTUS by Republicans and so forth. Nor even if it were, they are not convinced that abortion will ever be illegal in all 50 states. Nor even if that remote possibility ever occurred, that abortion would cease to exist. So in their consciences this is not enough of a reason for them to vote for your personal candidate for the WH.

 

[CMatt25]

Doesn’t make them right.

You’ll get no argument from me on that.

 

[BroomWagon]

Unlike you Lapey who apparently think you can, as in the words of Seekerz, “I cannot speak to the nuns’ position on abortion, but I would expect that it is aligned with that of the Church.”

I suspect the nuns pray deeply for the sanctity of life and pray every child brought into this world is wanted, loved, and cared for. Much like Catholics and Christians of various stripes and people of faith all over the world do. The nuns also protect the sanctity of life if you were to understand life’s sanctity includes not only the unborn. But as others have explained, I think Seekerz has done a great job in explaining this to you. Far better than I ever could. But caring about life starts before conception and goes far beyond the womb. To the lives of the poor, the lives of women before and after a pregnancy, the lives of children born into this world…

And I have already seen where many practicing faithful Catholics have already explained to you on another thread why they are not convinced electing Mitt Romney POTUS means the overturn of Roe, given the results of past nominations to the SCOTUS by Republicans and so forth. Nor even if it were, they are not convinced that abortion will ever be illegal in all 50 states. Nor even if that remote possibility ever occurred, that abortion would cease to exist. So in their consciences this is not enough of a reason for them to vote for your personal candidate for the WH.

Right, they are ill-informed, at least the Democrat Sacred Cow of Planned Parenthood can be taken down and would be without the obstinacy of the Democrat Platform.

 

[kimmielittle]

I think, from your posts you are sincere - I just don’t think you see the whole picture. Were you around on the forum for the health care debate and the talk of death panels? Talk of throwing granny off a cliff is where the rhetoric’s been at for a while now…

Curious are you saying there are no “Death Panels” - “Rationing of Care Panels”?

Could we get your thoughts on this?

June 14, 2012
Policy Analysis no. 700

The Independent Payment Advisory Board: PPACA’s Anti-Constitutional and Authoritarian Super-Legislature

by Diane Cohen and Michael F. Cannon

When a member of Congress introduces legislation, the Constitution requires that legislative proposal to secure the approval of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the president (unless Congress overrides a presidential veto) before it can become law. In all cases, either chamber of Congress may block it.

In 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) created the Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB. When the unelected government officials on this board submit a legislative proposal to Congress, it automatically becomes law: PPACA requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services to implement it. Blocking an IPAB “proposal” requires at a minimum that the House and the Senate and the president agree on a substitute. The Board’s edicts therefore can become law without congressional action, congressional approval, meaningful congressional oversight, or being subject to a presidential veto. Citizens will have no power to challenge IPAB’s edicts in court.

Worse, PPACA forbids Congress from repealing IPAB outside of a seven-month window in the year 2017, and even then requires a three-fifths majority in both chambers. A heretofore unreported feature of PPACA dictates that if Congress misses that repeal window, PPACA prohibits Congress from ever altering an IPAB “proposal.” By restricting lawmaking powers of future Congresses, PPACA thus attempts to amend the Constitution by statute.

IPAB’s unelected members will have effectively unfettered power to impose taxes and ration care for all Americans, whether the government pays their medical bills or not. In some circumstances, just one political party or even one individual would have full command of IPAB’s lawmaking powers. IPAB truly is independent, but in the worst sense of the word. It wields power independent of Congress, independent of the president, independent of the judiciary, and independent of the will of the people.

The creation of IPAB is an admission that the federal government’s efforts to plan America’s health care sector have failed. It is proof of the axiom that government control of the economy threatens democracy.

IPAB may be the most anti-constitutional measure ever to pass Congress, and it is therefore tempting to dismiss IPAB as an absurdity that the body politic will soon reject. Until that occurs, IPAB will potentially empower just one unelected government official to impose any tax or regulation, to appropriate funds, and to wield other lawmaking powers.

cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/independent-payment-advisory-board-ppacas-anticonstitutional-authoritarian-superlegislature

lifenews.com/2012/09/19/new-york-times-opinion-writer-we-need-death-panels/

 

[CMatt25]

So one priest is uncharitable towards the poor, and your entire faith is shaken. Jesus covered that kind of faith in his parable about the weeds already.

No while I’m shaken by other things too such as things I’ve read and been told, including this criticism I’m reading of Sister Simone and the Catholic nuns, I assure you my Christian faith is fine and remains unshaken.

 

[stevegravy]

Unlike you Lapey who apparently think you can, as in the words of Seekerz, “I cannot speak to the nuns’ position on abortion, but I would expect that it is aligned with that of the Church.”

I suspect the nuns pray deeply for the sanctity of life and pray every child brought into this world is wanted, loved, and cared for. Much like Catholics and Christians of various stripes and people of faith all over the world do. The nuns also protect the sanctity of life if you were to understand life’s sanctity includes not only the unborn. But as others have explained, I think Seekerz has done a great job in explaining this to you. Far better than I ever could. But caring about life starts before conception and goes far beyond the womb. To the lives of the poor, the lives of women before and after a pregnancy, the lives of children born into this world…

And I have already seen where many practicing faithful Catholics have already explained to you on another thread why they are not convinced electing Mitt Romney POTUS means the overturn of Roe, given the results of past nominations to the SCOTUS by Republicans and so forth. Nor even if it were, they are not convinced that abortion will ever be illegal in all 50 states. Nor even if that remote possibility ever occurred, that abortion would cease to exist. So in their consciences this is not enough of a reason for them to vote for your personal candidate for the WH.

Regarding all these well formed Catholic consciences that absolves themselves voting for baby killing, all I got to say is phooey. My little time in supervision has allowed me to see how incredibly capable the human mind is at warping itself. It is incredibly adapt at telling itself the biggest lie and believing it. I have seen employees deny physical evidence like it didn’t exist, when it was on the table in front of them.

So, really am I surprised by good Catholics voting for Mr. Abortion, NO. So, am I surprised they consider themselves good Catholics, NO. Do I think they will ever admit error and change their mind, Maybe, but don’t hold your breath.

Shake the dust off your feet and move on.

 

[Lochias]

No while I’m shaken by other things too such as things I’ve read and been told, including this criticism I’m reading of Sister Simone and the Catholic nuns, I assure you my Christian faith is fine and remains unshaken.

You’re not going to convince me, and you must know that. Who’re you really trying to convince?

 

[Lapey]

The whole democrat fight against tax plans by any republican is class warfare, divide and conquer. Divide the Church, divide the opposition to evil.

I think, from your posts you are sincere - I just don’t think you see the whole picture. Were you around on the forum for the health care debate and the talk of death panels? Talk of throwing granny off a cliff is where the rhetoric’s been at for a while now…

I find it kind of curous that you are speaking in terms of good and evil here? Who’s the good guy and who’s the evil one? Based on what criteria exactly?

Thank you for recognizing my words are sincere, however I do get the big picture. This is where we are separated. Instead of me having a legitimate opinion even though you disagree with my opinion is in line with the Church, so it is legitimate and does include the whole picture. I was here for the health care battle, not on this forum, but I was here speaking my piece against some of the provisions. Throwing granny was very much hyperbole, death panels may have been hyperbole in the name, but there is a reality of a board who will decide who receives care or not. This may not be truly death panels, but their role will be similar. This is not a health care bill debate though, so this is all I’m saying on this.

My statement above probably wasn’t articulated as well as it could have been for best understanding of my point. Everything we fight about between the parties and/or candidates it takes the eyes off the ball for the whole. We are discussing things that are immaterial in the whole scheme of things. We argue about whether the Ryan budget is good or bad, and in all honesty, there’s not a big difference in what has been proposed in years past. But what does the argument do for the fight of evil, what the Church defines as evil? Yes I am referring to the moral and social issues. It takes us away from the fight for the sanctity of life, and other major issues like this.

This is the evil, abortion and all of the life issues, same sex unions and the sanctity of marriage, all that the Church defines as evil. If we could come to trust what you wrote about me, that I appear to be sincere, then why do we discount anyone who opposes us? Instead of the vast majority voting against a very pro-abortion on demand incumbent, we are arguing these issues about PR throwing granny over the cliff.

So to answer your questions as simply as I can; the good guy is Mother Church and Her teachings, the evil guy are the intrinsic evils She is asking us to oppose. The criteria used is the entirety of the deposit of truth, Jesus Christ and His Body the Church. All of the answers are there, in scripture and in the documents and doctrines, all we have to do is understand there is a larger subject than which party I belong to. The truth is in His Church, not in a politician’s mouth or a party’s platform. We are called to make decisions based on the legitimate Catholic Social teachings, moral teachings, etc., not what MSNBC or FOX News tells us it is. Everything in the platforms, and coming from the candidates mouths has to be measured through the entire deposit of truth.